Player A is Brook Lopez. Player B is Bargnani (the one with fewer RPG- not PPG).

And it's a perfect example of how these surface stat comparisons mean very little. First of all, the fact that he was rumoured in talks doesn't mean Orlando would agree to it. I don't think anyone would take Lopez and a couple of mid to low first round picks for Howard. Not unless you were absolutely desperate.

Secondly, Lopez plays defense and has shown that he can rebound (unlike Bargnani). And I don't think ANYONE thought his rebounding numbers last year were acceptable, and it's probably one of the main reasons his reputation around the league plummeted. And still I think every team would still take him over Bargnani because, as I said, he's not a one-dimensional player.

Player A is Brook Lopez. Player B is Bargnani (the one with fewer RPG- not PPG).

And it's a perfect example of how these surface stat comparisons mean very little. First of all, the fact that he was rumoured in talks doesn't mean Orlando would agree to it. I don't think anyone would take Lopez and a couple of mid to low first round picks for Howard. Not unless you were absolutely desperate.

Secondly, Lopez plays defense and has shown that he can rebound (unlike Bargnani). And I don't think ANYONE thought his rebounding numbers last year were acceptable, and it's probably one of the main reasons his reputation around the league plummeted. And still I think every team would still take him over Bargnani because, as I said, he's not a one-dimensional player.

The Magic will be desperate though.

The Nets will likely be the only team that can take Turk in any deal without adding salary to the Magic beyond this year.

The Magic have amnestied Arenas and sending out Turk and trading Howard leaves them with $25M in payroll for next year.

The Magic automatically become the worst team in the league.... worse than Toronto, worse than the Bobcats hands down.

The 2012 draft is going to be deep. Their own pick will push for a top pick in 2012. Houston's will be around 15-20 and the New Jersey's will likely be around 20-25. In a deep draft, three first round draft picks is a very good thing.

Given the Magic's choices at this time, I think it is a good deal and the one that brings them back to relevancy the fastest.

Yikes man ... yes, he had a horrible supporting cast. Not their 'fault', not his either. How many games would the Raps have won last year with Dirk starting in place of Bargs? 5 more? 10 at most ... and he was the MVP of the NBA finals - with an amazing supporting cast to cover up his many shortcomings as a complete basketball player.

You think Dirk getting 10 more wins is nothing? With Dirk, the team would have vied for a playoff spot. With Bargnani they were one of the worst teams in the league. You replace Bargnani with Dirk on that "amazing" team and they would be lucky to win 47 games!

Does that 47 games sound familiar? It's the same number that The Raptors were able to win with Bosh and a supporting cast that wasn't nearly as good as the supporting cast Dirk has right now. So I can't imagine what the Raptors would have to surround Bargnani with to reach the same level as Dallas.

And while Dirk certainly has shortcomings, he's not a liability. In these discussions about Bargnani, why is this fact always brushed under the rug? Bargnani is a LIABILITY at least half the time he's on the court. He does NOTHING outside of scoring to help the team. NOTHING. He grabbed half a rebound more than a guy 8 inches shorter than him (I said 6 before, but I miscalculated)!!!!!!

The Nets will likely be the only team that can take Turk in any deal without adding salary to the Magic beyond this year.

The Magic have amnestied Arenas and sending out Turk and trading Howard leaves them with $25M in payroll for next year.

The Magic automatically become the worst team in the league.... worse than Toronto, worse than the Bobcats hands down.

The 2012 draft is going to be deep. Their own pick will push for a top pick in 2012. Houston's will be around 15-20 and the New Jersey's will likely be around 20-25. In a deep draft, three first round draft picks is a very good thing.

Given the Magic's choices at this time, I think it is a good deal and the one that brings them back to relevancy the fastest.

Ya, I wouldn't be shocked if they took the deal, either. I do think a team like Golden State will be able to offer a better deal. If Boston hadn't trade Jermaine O'Neal already, they could have offered ROndo and O'Neal + picks. Atlanta could offer them some nice players, too (Horford and Williams?). I'm surprised the Clippers didn't get more involved.

Still, you're right that there is an air of desperation for the Magic.

Ya, I wouldn't be shocked if they took the deal, either. I do think a team like Golden State will be able to offer a better deal. If Boston hadn't trade Jermaine O'Neal already, they could have offered ROndo and O'Neal + picks. Atlanta could offer them some nice players, too (Horford and Williams?). I'm surprised the Clippers didn't get more involved.

Still, you're right that there is an air of desperation for the Magic.

With Howard unwilling and from a money perspective better off not signing an extension, teams won't send off best assets with no guarantee.

Paul is a good example with GSW and LAC. GSW would not let go of Curry. LAC would not include Gordon.

With Howard unwilling and from a money perspective better off not signing an extension, teams won't send off best assets with no guarantee.

Paul is a good example with GSW and LAC. GSW would not let go of Curry. LAC would not include Gordon.

I heard that the Clippers wouldn't let go of Gordon, but I had read Curry was offered. A deal of Curry, Udoh and a couple of draft picks would be better than what the Nets can offer, in my opinion. Maybe throw in Biedrins, who they might be able to turn into something. Then Golden State can bid on Billups and they've got a pretty decent team (although I'm not big fans of Ellis or Lee).

I heard that the Clippers wouldn't let go of Gordon, but I had read Curry was offered. A deal of Curry, Udoh and a couple of draft picks would be better than what the Nets can offer, in my opinion. Maybe throw in Biedrins, who they might be able to turn into something. Then Golden State can bid on Billups and they've got a pretty decent team (although I'm not big fans of Ellis or Lee).

Curry was not offered without assurances of extension. That is why GSW went nuts for Tyson Chandler for an afternoon.

Superman will only sign with Brooklyn, Dallas or the Lakers. I expect the Lakers to move Bynum, who could be a superstar greater than any in the 2012 draft, for him soon. The Brooklyn tampering issue probably precludes him going there and anyway they don't have much to offer. Dallas has nothing to offer.

PPG is how you win a basketball game, scoring more points than the opposition. Yes, defence is a paramount concern - but you still need to manufacture lots of points, in lots of scenarios, on lots of nights ... that's pretty big in the scheme of things, if you wanna win.

So true. That's why the Phoenix Suns won all those championships the past 6 years.

I'm not really interested in what the writer points out, where he doesn't speak with a high level of familiarity with the team and their roster. "worst defender and the most pathetic rebounder for his size" ... source that 'fact'. Might as well say, "Everyone else is like a billion times better than him". Just annoying that a publication like ESPN puts out this kind of rabble.

Bargs is a terrible defender. He's also the most pathetic rebounder for his size, probably of all time. These ARE facts. A 7 footer who averages 6-ish rebounds is pathetic. There's no other way around that.

Bargnani is a 1-dimensional player ... and he is elite in that dimension. You need a balance of elite talent to be a contender. So the answer is to keep the elite talent when you have it, and find other pieces that balance the roster (hello Ed, hello Jonas).

He's not elite. Elite means you're the best, which he isn't. He's just good. If elite were a 10 out of 10, Bargs would be closer to 7 out of 10.

Using amnesty on Bargs would be stupid though since we could get something back for him.

Yes, Sacramento values scoring, which is not surprising considering they are a lottery team that hasn't been to the playoffs in years and need to make money for their owners who don't have a lot.

While I'm obviously no fan of THornton (and believe that Sacramento is going to regret offering that contract), doesn't it worry you that a player who is 6 inches shorter than Bargnani was able to get eerily similar stats, including nearly matching him in the rebounding department? And that player is not even close to considered an All-Star. Imagine if Thornton just averaged a rebound or 2 more? Hey, if Bargnani can conceivably do it, why not Thornton?

This is my whole point about people bringing up these meaningless, surface stats and pretending they mean more than they do. Averaging 21 ppg in the NBA is definitely an accomplishment, but too many people seem to overvalue it, especially when it's done on a bad team. Someone I've brought up as an example before is Tony Campbell. Another guy who could score on a bad team.

See, what people who overvalue scoring seem to forget is that the players who score on good teams, are actually able to do other things to help their team, as well. It's an INCREDIBLY important aspect that never seems to get mentioned. That's why they get the minutes and shots they do. Stick Marcus Thornton on Mavericks and he gets 10 mpg. If that. Why? Because good teams already have scorers. And those scorers do other things other than score. So a guy like Thornton or Bargnani are simply not nearly as valuable as they are on a bad team, who just needs someone to fill up the score sheet.

There's a reason why a guy like Al Harrington scores and plays less the better the team he is on. Why an excellent scorer, like Corey Maggette, can score nearly 20 ppg for Golden State, yet be given away for cap space and why, despite his ability to score on a team that desperately needed scoring (Milwaukee), he averaged the fewest mpg in 10 years and barely lasted a year before being shipped off to another lottery team.

Sure.

I just posted factual information about Marcus Thornton coz you were mis-informing us ("The first player is a restricted free agent who is getting almost no interest from around the league."). Oh and he pretty much averaged 25pts in NO when CP3 was injured.

I just posted factual information about Marcus Thornton coz you were mis-informing us ("The first player is a restricted free agent who is getting almost no interest from around the league."). Oh and he pretty much averaged 25pts in NO when CP3 was injured.

What do you mean "sure"? Is that the extent to which you can debate the facts I presented?

At the time I posted my comment, I hadn't read that he'd gotten a contract offer. For that I apologize, but it doesn't exactly change my argument. The teams that had interest in him were lottery teams. Not surprising.

And I ALREADY stated that Thornton averaged pretty much the same stats the previous season when he got minutes. But the fact is that even when he was scoring all those points, it didn't help New Orleans play much better. The team went 9-19 in games he played 30+ mpg.

And quite frankly, I'd rather have Thornton than Bargnani because at least THornton's poor defense doesn't hurt as much because it's on the wing and not in the middle.

Please explain to me how Bargnani is any different from Corey Maggette, Marcus Thornton, Al Harrington, Tony Campbell or one of the other many one dimensional scorers whose minutes and shots decreased the better the team they were on? How is he any different from an Orlando Woolridge?

What do you mean "sure"? Is that the extent to which you can debate the facts I presented?

At the time I posted my comment, I hadn't read that he'd gotten a contract offer. For that I apologize, but it doesn't exactly change my argument. The teams that had interest in him were lottery teams. Not surprising.

And I ALREADY stated that Thornton averaged pretty much the same stats the previous season when he got minutes. But the fact is that even when he was scoring all those points, it didn't help New Orleans play much better. The team went 9-19 in games he played 30+ mpg.

And quite frankly, I'd rather have Thornton than Bargnani because at least THornton's poor defense doesn't hurt as much because it's on the wing and not in the middle.

Please explain to me how Bargnani is any different from Corey Maggette, Marcus Thornton, Al Harrington, Tony Campbell or one of the other many one dimensional scorers whose minutes and shots decreased the better the team they were on? How is he any different from an Orlando Woolridge?

Im not sure why youre being all confrontational, I just initially commented on the info you were giving out about Thornton not getting interest from other teams.

I didnt even comment on the Bargnani part. Dont really want to comment on that anymore since we've already gone over that in the Everything Bargnani thread numerous times before.

If you can point out exactly where in my initial comment that i said anything about Bargnani, then id gladly respond.

Oh, and you know who has a terrible shot selection? That's Nowitzki. He shot 39% of his shots from 16-23 feet. That's an amazing 30% more than Bargnani. Wow: using stats in isolation just to prove any opinion is fun.

Oh, and you know who has a terrible shot selection? That's Nowitzki. He shot 39% of his shots from 16-23 feet. That's an amazing 30% more than Bargnani. Wow: using stats in isolation just to prove any opinion is fun.

Quite true (about using stats selectively). But, I didnt just decide to make that observation and not realize that the audience knows something about the player involved.

Nowitzki's shot selection? He can try to make any shot he wants!! He actually practises those ridiculous one-footed and one-handed (simultaneously) shots he makes from that "danger" zone....because they are un-defensible. I think he also made playoffs MVP. So yes, in my books, he can make any shot he wants, at any time. The paradox is that he has supreme confidence no matter the shot...Bargnani, I doubt it is as much.

Demar? I didnt know that and I'll take your word for it. But I'll chalk it up to his inexperience and obviously the lower overall shots he takes (and hence lower # of "danger" shots) as compared to AB.

As someone else wrote...it would be better/make more sense to take the 3 pt shot rather than trying for those extremely long 2s. DD should absolutely not even think about it...his game at this time being to get to the rim or the 10-15 jumper at most. I dont see his practices so until he has shown an upgrade in his long range shot he should just stay within himself (cliche...sorry).

I just hope AB ups his game this year. Nothing I can say that hasnt been said here before. I am just hoping the change in coaching staff will help.

A major part of the team's problem (no secret) that there was no accountability and I sometimes wonder how often Triano would actually confront these guys on various issues.

Quite true (about using stats selectively). But, I didnt just decide to make that observation and not realize that the audience knows something about the player involved.

So, your intent is to preach to the choir? A big problem with the Bargnani discussion is that most of the time it's ridiculously biased (and repetitive as their is no convincing people). Some people who are anti-Bargnani want to use everything aginst him and use every stat available that CAN be explained as something against Bargnani in total isolation of the total picture.

Bendit wrote:

Nowitzki's shot selection? He can try to make any shot he wants!! He actually practises those ridiculous one-footed and one-handed (simultaneously) shots he makes from that "danger" zone....because they are un-defensible. I think he also made playoffs MVP. So yes, in my books, he can make any shot he wants, at any time. The paradox is that he has supreme confidence no matter the shot...Bargnani, I doubt it is as much.

That was last year (him being MVP and winning for a change), and last year he did shoot 52% from 16-23 feet, but after 2007/8 he had three years where he shot 46/47/48 % which is only slightly better than Bargnani's 44% from last year (which was above the league average of about 40/42%). And, for example, if one is being honest one has to take into account the fact that it's easier for Nowitzki because of his supporting cast. Amongst others, Nowitzki last year had good 3point shooters spreading the floor, something which Bargnani does not have (besides Calderon) which makes it much more easy to defend Bargnani because opponents don't have to close out on shooters.

If you just say it's a bad shot because of the shotlocation, than it would be a bad shot for Nowitzki as well. If we take into account other factors for Nowitzki we should for Bargnani as well.

Bendit wrote:

Demar? I didnt know that and I'll take your word for it. But I'll chalk it up to his inexperience and obviously the lower overall shots he takes (and hence lower # of "danger" shots) as compared to AB.

You can easily verify this by going to hoopdata.com and calculate it. Maybe there is even a site where you can directly get the percentages that I'm not aware of. No need to take my word for it.

Bendit wrote:

As someone else wrote...it would be better/make more sense to take the 3 pt shot rather than trying for those extremely long 2s. DD should absolutely not even think about it...his game at this time being to get to the rim or the 10-15 jumper at most. I dont see his practices so until he has shown an upgrade in his long range shot he should just stay within himself (cliche...sorry).

I have to disagree, about DD as well as about Bargnani.

1) Between 16-23 feet are not all extremely long shots. A lot of those shots are from a position from where they can go to the basket as well as pull up for the shot. You don't really get that double threat from three point range. It's really hard to make plays that far away from the basket.

Bargnani's FTA/FGA (freethrows attempted / fieldgoals attempted) was 30%, which is not too bad (Derozan was at 35% btw). Logically the foulrate was much higher on isolation/PNR-man/Post-Ups (11%/9,5%/7,7%) than on Spot-Ups (5,5%).

2) And we need 1) because in our starting line-up of last year, those were the two players which were asked to be the primary scorers. Bargnani had a high usage rating, much higher than it should be in my opinion, but was that because he just look to shoot the ball any chance he got? Did he just go against the plays and plans of the coaches, was he just doing his own thing? I don’t think so, I think that’s what was being asked of him and considering the lack of players with a diverse offensive arsenal that wasn’t illogical. Just to re´terate: besides Bargnani and Calderon there wasn’t a player in our starting line-up (after Kleiza went down) that could shoot the three at a rate better than 25%(!)

Besides, taking 30% of his shots from 16-23 feet is only slightly more than some of the top teams average from that range. Atlanta 30%, Boston 29%, Chicago 27%, Miami 29%. Do you suggest they are all doing it wrong?

If you want Bargnani to just spot up at the threepoint line and you want DeRozan too just take jumpers if he is within 15 feet you are asking the team (we had last year – starting line-up of Calderon/DeRozan/Johnson/Johnson or Davis/Bargnani) to become extremely inflexible on offense. That would be terrible.

By the way, it’s hard to get a jumpshot from 10-15 feet as it’s only about 10% of the shots taken in the league. I’m glad DeRozan extended his range on the long jumpers to an acceptable level (just below or around the league average). For example: without range on the team, even though it was still limited, I don’t believe for one second that Amir Johnson would have been able to be as efficient as he was cutting to the basket, on the PNR and on offensive rebounds.

Bendit wrote:

I just hope AB ups his game this year. Nothing I can say that hasnt been said here before. I am just hoping the change in coaching staff will help.

I am not at all happy with Bargnani’s efficiency, in case you think I am. But you can’t just look at his efficiency without looking at the team he played in and what and how much he was asked to do and at least think about how that might affect his efficiency. Bargnani getting more efficient has a lot to do with lowering his usage, which means we need more weapons.

Bendit wrote:

A major part of the team's problem (no secret) that there was no accountability and I sometimes wonder how often Triano would actually confront these guys on various issues.

I’m glad he didn’t because the issues you mention are not the right ones. Accountability is very well if you can also teach and train the team to do things well. As bad as we were defensivily, that’s not just solved by holding people accountable (as we would have no player left after the first game!), you got to have some balance in the team and you have to be able to teach the right things.

Oh, and you know who has a terrible shot selection? That's Nowitzki. He shot 39% of his shots from 16-23 feet. That's an amazing 30% more than Bargnani. Wow: using stats in isolation just to prove any opinion is fun.

The big difference, though, is that both Dirk and DeRozan get to the line at a very high rate. Even though Bargnani improved in that area, he's still pretty poor at getting to the line, compared with how many shots he takes.

The big difference, though, is that both Dirk and DeRozan get to the line at a very high rate. Even though Bargnani improved in that area, he's still pretty poor at getting to the line, compared with how many shots he takes.

My point is something else. Nevertheless I agree in part, except for the semantics. "Pretty poor" = fta/fga at 30%, where "a very high rate" is respectively 35% and 38%. But that 30% is exactly the average of the league, with only three teams higher than DeRozan's 35% and most teams around that 30% (+ or - 1/2 %). For example, Toronto and LA are at 29,3%, whereas the NBA champions are even below that.

So, Bargnani shoots from 16-23 feet just a little more than average, he scores also just above average (which should even out) and he goes to the freethrowline at an average rate (I agreed in part because I'd like Bargnani to get to the freethrow line more as well).

There doesn't seem a lot wrong or poor here, except that some people are now thinking about the reply "But if he's average on offense, but below average on defense, that means we were right after all?" which would be taking things out of context again, but I'm not going to bet against this happening...